cst_get_surface_current

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description adds behavioral context beyond the schema by specifying that the simulation must be completed and that a surface current monitor is required. However, it does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, side effects, or error conditions like missing monitors.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is three concise sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. Each sentence adds essential context without unnecessary fluff.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity, the description covers the main precondition (completed simulation, monitor) and purpose. However, it lacks details on the output format or return type, which would enhance completeness.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, providing baseline of 3. The description adds meaning for the 'frequency' parameter by linking it to a required monitor, but does not add extra information for 'component'. The added context is modest.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'extract' and the resource 'surface current density distribution', specifying the context of a completed CST simulation at a specific frequency. It differentiates from siblings like cst_get_current_distribution by focusing on surface current and requiring a monitor.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear context for use (understanding current flow on antenna structures, identifying hot spots) and states a prerequisite (surface current monitor at the specified frequency). However, it does not explicitly compare to alternative tools like cst_get_current_distribution.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.